Re: Comment on the "Abbreviations" Thread Tizzy

[garwillis@msn.com (Garfield Willis)]

On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 10:57:02 -0400, "D. Barry Stubbs"
<z24man@earthlink.net> wrote:

>First, have no fear that the compilation I posted to both of the other
>lists were attributed to this, the GMECM, list, clearly and without any
>regard to my personal knowledge or authorship.  That message was how
>several people have come to ask me the procedure for joining this list.

Yep, I noticed that in your last, but was hoping for this unequivocal
statement from you, to completely clear the air. What you have above is
what I had expected from an oldtimer; forgive the "manipulation", but I
just thot under the circumstances, you needed to take the opportunity to
scream bloody innocence (in that detailed and particular way :).

>I assume that they recognize the value of the information here and wish
>to seek it themselves firsthand.  For anyone who wishes to verify of my
>credit to this list, you can see the archives of the v6jbody and the
>BerettaNet list on eGroups (I hope those are set for public viewing). 
>Search for the subject "Automotive Abbreviations" or something like
>that.

Nah, I doubt if anyone doubts you, especially now. But someone will
check you out anyway, I'm sure. Hee hee.

>Second, you are correct in saying that my posting sounded like a "wrap &
>ship," and I admit to that being somewhat of my intention.  Of course it
>(being the abbreviation list) is not complete.  But, it was my singular
>intention to concentrate the efforts contained in about a dozen messages
>and to rehash that information in a cleaned-up but in no way "edited for
>content" document.  That is part of how I organize things:  I tend to
>take the blister-pak off and group it together.  By alphabetizing and
>removing duplicates, it was my intention to increase the concentration
>of that knowledge, not add my personal scent to it.

Yeah, that first sentence above is where I think things went sour. Oh
well, I'm sure you hadn't expected stepping on a mine. :)  That
"decision" would normally devolve to the few major contributors to any
joint effort, just out of courtesy and acknowledgment for their larger
roles. Not tryna make rules here; rather just observing what normally
goes on in any team effort started by a few kernel people. The "modus
operandi" of summarizing is a vital one when you're trying to jointly
develop some resource in this kinda venue, it's a VERY important
contribution; THAT I don't think was the problem, but rather seeming to
take charge of the "wrap up" and then the "shipping", ifyawill. Live &
learn, I guess.

>I also admit to being more of an open-source type person,
>and such was the motivation of my intentions.

Sure, most all of us here are also (unless forced at gun-point to the
contrary :). Hey, even the Free Software Foundation makes stipulations
on HOW their "permissions" work. You realize of course that by the very
nature of their "licensing agreement", that they are NOT simply and
without restrictions releasing stuff into the "public domain"? Even in
that high and lauditory "open source" environment, they're exercising
their minimal "ownership" of the goodies by their non-commercial
provisos.

[The following not directed at anyone at all or in particular, just
observations, OK?]

Nothing is so free and open that you can ignore the simple fact that
someone(s) made it happen, and to share it is an act of generosity and
comradery that doesn't go very long unacknowledged/unthanked before the
landscape goes dry and every good thing slowly dies out. And it's not
that people live to get patted on the back, either; it's just that when
someone takes without even a thank you, thinking "Hey, it's free, right?
So why should I thank anyone?", the person sharing goes from enjoying
the experience, to wondering if they're simply being taken advantage of.
Yeah, I'm sure most all of us recognize that fact, but given the
frequency of misunderstandings along these lines, it can't hurt to
bubble it up to the surface at times.

These days that's not simply a truism that deserves a mere nod and mild
acquiescence; free collaboration among friends is something delicate and
valuable that's currently (IMNSHO) headed for the endangered species
list, and needs a real concerted effort to bring back to a thriving
state. The internet has *really* opened up great possibilities for
distributed joint development amongst buddies, but it hasn't changed the
nature of what makes human beings tick, just made the interaction a bit
more dicey from the lack of direct contact. BTW, I'm making this comment
in general, and NOT about the DIY lists; they DO seem to be thriving
quite nicely, just let's don't take it for granted, eh?

Garfossil


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org